Author
Topic: Patent: Canon EF 50 f/1.8 IS (Read 65853 times)

I can't tell you how many times I shot video using the 50mm 1.8 and wishing it had IS. IS benefits both video and still shooters, so why are we having a debate about this? If you don't want to pay for IS than stick with your current 50mm lenses.

Logged

canon rumors FORUM

paul13walnut5

Because it seems once again that canon are lagging behind nikon, if not in terms of quality then in terms of value. Nikon launched a line of cheap cheerful optically good g primes, canon redesigns old favourites and puts them at a price beyond many. The nifty fifty is a staple and its strengths and weaknesses well documented. Make a new version costing 4x as much and scrap the old version (ala 24, 28, 35) and the lens on which many a novice master dof and perspective becomes an exclusive tool.

If this new 50mm will have the same optical/built/IS quality than the recent 24/28/35 IS, I'll definitely welcome it to my equipment. I bet it will be, just like the others I mentioned, a new overpriced lens that will come without weather sealing or even a lens hood, but if you need a good, fast standard lens with IS, it looks like you don't have many alternatives...

The argument for IS being used mostly for video is ridiculous. Like said previously, serious video use requires a support system just like some types of serious photography require a tripod. IS was introduced to lenses far before the video feature was introduced to DSLR. People used to argue often about NOT having IS in the body, which was also ridiculous since optical IS is better than electronic IS. They have IS on wide angle lenses like 24mm and 28mm now, why would it be impractical at 50mm? Just turn it off if you don't like it, or buy the old version. Or troll on out of here to another brand =P

Incorrect! I know many shooters who use IS lenses for making music videos hand held. and I mean music videos that play on major networks. Not sure if you're into hip hop, but if so, Ace hood, bird man, Future, ring a bell?Theres a young man by the name of Edgar Esteves who shoots these and many other talent videos. Before he moved on to Red cameras, he used 5d's all the time with guess what... IS lenses. Not everyone who would like this lens is shooting 100 million dollar motion pictures. IJS

Serious video use requires a support system just like some types of serious photography require a tripod.

If you're doing a war reportage, you would benefit more from an IS than from a tripod or a steadicam... that's just an extreme example, the point is that dogmas are always harmful. Even with a professional "support system" like a rig or a camera stabilizer, IS can be very useful. I almost never shoot hand held, but I turn on the IS very often.

People used to argue often about NOT having IS in the body, which was also ridiculous since optical IS is better than electronic IS.

In-camera IS can also be mechanic (sensor-shift). Canon claims to use an in-lens stabilizer to customize it for each lens and get the best performances. This choice has its pros (you see a stabilized image in the viewfinder and, if what Canon and Nikon say it's true, you get better results) and its cons (much more expensive lenses and less chances to have an up-to-date IS system, since you usually change bodies more often than you change lenses).

Make a new version costing 4x as much and scrap the old version (ala 24, 28, 35) and the lens on which many a novice master dof and perspective becomes an exclusive tool.

I actually think that is a great point to make. "All" of us, at some point, bought our first fast lens, and they were mostly the cheapos, and that is when we saw how frikkin cool it is to play with DOF, and where we started to want more and maybe ending up with two-three, ten fast primes earning Canon som serious money.

Make a new version costing 4x as much and scrap the old version (ala 24, 28, 35) and the lens on which many a novice master dof and perspective becomes an exclusive tool.

I actually think that is a great point to make. "All" of us, at some point, bought our first fast lens, and they were mostly the cheapos, and that is when we saw how frikkin cool it is to play with DOF, and where we started to want more and maybe ending up with two-three, ten fast primes earning Canon som serious money.

If no novice can afford a fast lens anymore...

+1 my first lens purchase was the 50mm f/1.8II. It's a gateway lens for sure!

Logged

Move along nothing to see here!

canon rumors FORUM

crasher8

I 2nd the post which said "Just turn it off" but those folks will complain about having to pay extra for it being there. Well, if it also comes with TRUE ring USM , a better build than the 1.4 and sharper wide open then be happy for the improvements you CAN use because you can't please everyone all of the time yadda yadda yadda

I 2nd the post which said "Just turn it off" but those folks will complain about having to pay extra for it being there. Well, if it also comes with TRUE ring USM , a better build than the 1.4 and sharper wide open then be happy for the improvements you CAN use because you can't please everyone all of the time yadda yadda yadda

Just to put this whole yes/no to IS discussion in perspective:

I haven't heard anybody complaining nowadays that a lens is AF and argue why pay for the AF mechanism if you can MF just fine???

IS is like AF, it may take a while for (almost) everyone to adopt it, but it's technological advancement and quite literally 'IS' the future

Of course not all lenses will become IS just like not all lenses are AF.

In-camera IS can also be mechanic (sensor-shift). Canon claims to use an in-lens stabilizer to customize it for each lens and get the best performances. This choice has its pros (you see a stabilized image in the viewfinder and, if what Canon and Nikon say it's true, you get better results) and its cons (much more expensive lenses and less chances to have an up-to-date IS system, since you usually change bodies more often than you change lenses).

I guess it's too much to hope that Canon would ever end this particular debate by joining Olympus, Pentax and Sony and putting IS in the camera, thereby making every lens you stabilized (if you want). The IBIS system in the top level Olympus cameras works superbly (and you can see its effect through the viewfinder), at least as well as the best Canon IS, maybe better. I believe that Panasonic is about to make the switch from in-lens IS (like Canon & Sony, not all their lenses have it) to in-body IS; if they can, why not Canon? It may add a bit to the cost of the body, but it's surely cheaper (both for them and the consumer) than putting it in lenses. Plus, as you say, you can keep updating it if necessary when you buy a new body. Plus, a lot of "legacy" lenses suddenly become more appealing....

paul13walnut5

For in body IS you are really going to have to keep your fingers crossed that the image circle thrown by your lens can withstand it.

Especially all those legacy lenses designed for film that stayed firmly within the image circle.

Perhaps canons solution is an anachronism from film, maybe it is, as they claim, to make the is behave specifically for a given lens type (could be dialed into the sensor firmware?

Either way, I hope they make a new nifty fifty but keep it thrifty.If it has IS then it will be as redundant as my direct print button (for me, I know how much y'all love the direct print button) so long as it is affordable.

For in body IS you are really going to have to keep your fingers crossed that the image circle thrown by your lens can withstand it.

Especially all those legacy lenses designed for film that stayed firmly within the image circle.

Perhaps canons solution is an anachronism from film, maybe it is, as they claim, to make the is behave specifically for a given lens type (could be dialed into the sensor firmware?

Either way, I hope they make a new nifty fifty but keep it thrifty.If it has IS then it will be as redundant as my direct print button (for me, I know how much y'all love the direct print button) so long as it is affordable.

Ah yes the direct print button! Because after we've fiddled about with a usb cable we simply won't have time to go into the menu and errr print.

RAW + JPEG button comes in close second for redundancy in my opinion. It came in really handy that one time I used it in 3 years (mainly to see if a Genie would pop out).

I also find the dof preview button not only pointless but idiotically placed, especially on my 5D2. Any way to disable that?

But sorry back on topic - IS in body bad! Boo! We like lens IS because it makes nice humming noises and clicking sounds so we know we are getting our moneys worth!

paul13walnut5

I also find the dof preview button not only pointless but idiotically placed, especially on my 5D2. Any way to disable that?

But sorry back on topic - IS in body bad! Boo! We like lens IS because it makes nice humming noises and clicking sounds so we know we are getting our moneys worth!

And adds extra atmosphere to our video soundtrack!

I personally like the dofp button. Prefer the position on my 3 (similar to the 1 series) but it is useful for me at times, especially if using off camera flash on a stand, gives me a visual preview of flash modelling.

I also find the dof preview button not only pointless but idiotically placed, especially on my 5D2. Any way to disable that?

But sorry back on topic - IS in body bad! Boo! We like lens IS because it makes nice humming noises and clicking sounds so we know we are getting our moneys worth!

And adds extra atmosphere to our video soundtrack!

I personally like the dofp button. Prefer the position on my 3 (similar to the 1 series) but it is useful for me at times, especially if using off camera flash on a stand, gives me a visual preview of flash modelling.

Curious about this off camera flash and dof preview button now. Might have to try that out. Thanks!